Came across this via Irish Dragon. It’s so well written any comment from me would be a waste of breath.

Need? We need not justify.

When asked what I do for a living I reply: I teach people how to shoot people. I teach people how to shoot people because some people need to be shot – and they need to be shot NOW.

I have found that in the long run sugarcoating reality rarely produces good results. Yes, it might make some people “feel” better, but feelings and reality are often polar opposites. Pretending something is what it is not only postpones judgment day, and the longer it’s ignored, the higher the price.

26 years ago I began my involvement with “gun rights”. I had a good grasp on what Article II of the Bill of Rights was about then, and my thoughts haven’t changed since. Article II is about the individual’s ability to shoot tyrants – plain and simple. It has nothing to do with hunting, collecting or competition. And tyranny, as I define it, may appear in the form of a rapist in the alley, a mob during civil unrest, an invading military, or one’s own government.

I personally own no “sporting arms.” I own and train with auto-loading, magazine fed weapons; rifles and pistols which are designed to get hot and function during conflict. Most are black and “scary looking”, and that suits me just fine – I’m not in the rainbows and unicorns business, I’m in the force business. What I, and thousands of other instructors around the country do, is provide the necessary skills that Americans need to deploy firearms in tyranny’s direction. We don’t teach people how to play games or take quail; we teach people how to effectively launch bullets into the bodies of tyrants.

And to such tyrants, my advice is this:

If you don’t want to find yourself on the business end of my rifle, then behave yourself.

As long as there is a free exchange of goods and services, a system of justice, a redress of grievances and I’m free to walk unmolested, there will be no problem. If not, expect trouble.

Joe Biden and Diane Feinstein may pretend that they don’t understand such things, but they do. They understand perfectly what AR-15?s are for, and that’s exactly why their bodyguards have them. You see, like most criminals, they aren’t interested in a fight. They came about their power the old fashioned way, they lied, cheated and stole their way to the point where they are protected by men with guns at taxpayer expense.

The notion of armed peasants in “their kingdom” scares the living hell out of them. It interferes with their plan. They know they are up to no good, and they know that someday the population will be on to them – If not them specifically, then some future generation of socialist/fascist tyrants who worship them as gods. They also understand that a willing population armed with semi-automatic battle rifles can only be pushed so far. That they work so hard to disarm us should be a clue to anyone paying attention.

I understand and accept the responsibility of liberty. To be free, one must be willing to fight for it…not just on civic level (letter writing, voting, jury duty, etc…), but all the way up to the use of physical force. In my opinion, it is the right, responsibility and duty of every able free person, to own, train with, and be willing to use, arms. Real arms – not your great uncle’s duck gun – but weapons of war.

It is far past time for us to take control of the debate. We need to stop making excuses for why we own guns, and we need to stop apologizing for our personal liberty.

We are not subjects.
We are not serfs.
We are not slaves.

Some will never understand that, and so be it. However, there are millions who have never considered such things, and they never will if we continue to pretend that our guns have any other use than to force the expiration of tyranny.

We are free people, armed to the teeth – And we should not be interested in living any other way!

While you may feel that armed rebellion is good, it is still treason. Our constitution does not support overthrowing a duely elected government

Our founding fathers laid out a long path to secede from the British. You need to really understand what the second ammendment is saying. It is a simple statement that a standing army is not a good idea. States militia should act as defense. That failed hard in the war of 1812, and by the time of the civil war, it was done and gone.

Randolph @ #:
Randolph, where to start. First, off we don’t feel that armed rebellion is good. In fact, we understand exactly how destructive and bad it would be. But we also know that it is our last recourse in defense of our liberty. Our Constitution, unequivocally allows, nay, it DEMANDS the overthrow of the duly (not duely by the way) elected government and it lays the framework for doing so, every two years in fact. The Founders provided us the mechanism to dissolve our government, but not the Constitution. We have four boxes with which to do it, the soap box (freedom of speech), the ballot box (elections), the jury box (redress of grievances, impeachment, jury of our peers, nullification etc.) and the cartridge box (the force of arms given to the people so that may resist a government that has become tyrannical). Randolph says:

Our founding fathers laid out a long path to secede from the British.

As laid out in the Declaration of Independence. And if you were to actually read it and then compare their list of grievances to what the fed leviathan is doing now, you would see that they would have been shooting a long time ago. The fact that we haven’t yet is testament to not only our patience, but to our faith in the system our Founders gave us to prevent us having to open that last box.

You need to really understand what the second ammendment is saying.

Trust me, we do. It seems that you are the one who is unfamiliar with its intent.Randolph says:

It is a simple statement that a standing army is not a good idea. States militia should act as defense. That failed hard in the war of 1812, and by the time of the civil war, it was done and gone.

You’re as historically ignorant as you are constitutionally ignorant. Yes, the Founders were suspicious of a standing army, but they also recognized that one was necessary for the common defense as well, which is why they provided the mechanism for one to exist in the Constitution. And yes the militia failed in quite a few instances during the War of 1812, but so did the regulars. The militia also has some stunning successes, such as New Orleans. However your assertion that the militia system as a form of national defense was gone by the Civil War is totally false. The Army of the Potomac was over 90% state militia in federal service. This continued until WWI.
I’ve been far more polite with you than the other pups will be, so I hope you have a skin tough enough to defend your points against what’s coming you way. I hope you do, the debate will be welcome and I hope you stick around long enough for us to have some fun with you.LC 0311 Sir Crunchie I.M.H., K.o.E. recently posted..The Silver Lining To the Approaching Thunderstorm

The answer is simple. I do not have to express a NEED to exercise a RIGHT.

Why do I “need” an AR-15 with a 30-round mag?

None of your damn business. If what goes on between our legs is private thanks to penumbras and eminations, then the plain language “…shall not be infringed.” is more than sufficient to make what’s in my gun cabinet MY business, and MY business alone. Fully auto, Semi auto, revolver, single shot. It doesn’t matter. No permission slips (really, accepting the idea of asking permission of the very entity we have the right to keep in check by way of that right is the definition of absurdity), no registries, and no warrantless searches. Our parents and grandparents made a mistake in accepting such infringements in the first place, and it’s well past time for the camel to get its damn nose back out from under the tent.Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere recently posted..The Sky Is Falling, Part 394

Ah, Randolph, always good to see such rigorous scholarship on display.

First, you might brush up on the definition of “treason”, at least as laid out under that very same Constitution:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

Treason is a serious matter. So serious that it would require testimony of two witnesses to reach a conviction, in a court duly convened under the Constitution. For better or worse, it may be argued that certain courts (e.g., administrative courts under IRS regulations) are not Constitutional. What might happen in the case of open rebellion, as in Shay’s and the Whiskey Rebellion, remains to be determined, as is the question of what “levying War” means in the modern context, and what role things like jury nullification might play in that process.

That aside, I’m glad you have such… interesting opinions on the meaning of the Second Amendment.

Interesting, but wrong.

Take a look at DC v. Heller. Read it slowly and carefully, for meaning and try not to move your lips. The Second Amendment has nothing to do with telling us how bad standing armies are or whether the several States can have militias. It doesn’t even mention deer hunting or Sporting Clays. The Second Amendment identifies and strictly limits the power of government to infringe on an existing human right to keep and bear arms. Period.

As to whether States’ militias “failed hard in the war (sic) of 1812″, I refer you to the Battle of New Orleans. I would also point out that States’ militias only began to be federalized under the Militia Act of 1903, some 38 years after the end of the Civil war.

I confess I’m confused as to exactly what points you’re trying to further, but that makes two of us.

While you may feel that armed rebellion is good, it is still treason. Our constitution does not support overthrowing a duely elected government

With all due respect: DUH! The first thing any new government does when it takes power is to make it a crime to overthrow the government. Power must be perpetuated at all costs. However, if you believe that governmental authority is based on the consent of the governed — which is what our system of government is ostensibly based on — then the governed have the right to overthrow the government at their whim. Either government is a servant of the populace, or the populace is a servant of the government – those are the only two options.

militia should act as defense. That failed hard in the war of 1812, and by the time of the civil war, it was done and gone.

Uh, many, if not most, of the units in the Civil War were (or came out of) the militia. Oh, a citizen militia did fairly well on United 93, too. On 09-11, government forces went 0-3, but self-organized citizens were 1-0.

Ah Randolph, I think you know not where you tread. You see many around here have taken that Oath that includes the phrase “Preserve, Protect and Defend the Constitution of the United states against all enemies Foreign and Domestic!”

Should any given Government cross the line by Violation of that Constitution to become a “Domestic Enemy” it would NOT be Treason for us, it would be our DUTY!

Of course a shallow mouth breather like you could not understand that! But I digress for you are not that, you are a simple HuffPo Troll! Now go back to the cave from whence you came!

Or your Mommy’s basement, whichever is closer! LC Old Dog recently posted..Whos War on Women?

Luckily, it isn’t anything that can’t be cured by reading the Anti-Federalist Papers, and then the First Book of Blackstone’s Commentaries.

If he still doesn’t get it, then there is always The Second Amendment Primer.

BIW- It’s probably pointless , because you cant fix stupid, but I’ll give it a shot at educating the newly arrived chew toy – duty to the Empire and all that.

Crunchie Sez:

I’ve been far more polite with you than the other pups will be, so I hope you have a skin tough enough to defend your points against what’s coming you way. I hope you do, the debate will be welcome and I hope you stick around long enough for us to have some fun with you.

Is that fresh Gopher meat I smell Crunch….it’s is isn’t it!?! Mhhmmm, I do love me some Gopher…..Pass the fucking peas…lets get our grub on

While you may feel that armed rebellion is good, it is still treason. Our constitution does not support overthrowing a duely elected government
Our founding fathers laid out a long path to secede from the British.

Aieeee…My head. You’ve obviously just graduated Cum Slurp Ho from The University of “The Stoopid”. Congratulations!

Here – let me get a bright pretty crayon so I can spell this out for you. You’ve already been rather nicely clue batted by several of the denizens of the Empire so there’s not a whole lot left – but I’m bored – low hanging fruit and all that.
Fair warning – I’m an ornery cuss – some would even say “virulently mean” and hard on things like others “self esteem”. It’s a talent, but consider yourself lucky, at least so far – The Emperor himself hasn’t turned his gaze your way …That shit is nuclear.

Anyhow, with the preliminaries out of the way, let’s begin shall we?

You’ve contradicted yourself; While the U.S Constitution may not support “treason” or “overthrowing a duely (said in context – the word is spelled duly) elected government” you, as noted by others, have obviously not attached any significance what so ever to the document that originally gave the US Constitution its gravity. That would be the Declaration of Independence. Part of that “long path the Founders laid out” you’re yammering about.

I know this might be a bit hard to play connect the dots here for a Gopher with an advance degree in belly lint collections and star gazing but do try to read along and follow the bright shiny crayon as we go through this mkay?

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

Bang – right out of the gate the Founding Fathers were pretty direct and candid on the issues of ‘dissolving the political bands” In other words replacing a government – “treason” as you call it. Okay Gopher – put you’re Crayola on dot one. Got it?…Good! Excellent What a bright Gopher you are indeed.

Then they state – again in plain easy to understand language – language used mostly, because I would imagine they too were confronted with the spectacle of your Gopher Great – Great – Great Grand Daddy popping his furry head up and mewling piteously about treason -They were called Tory’s or Loyalists back in the day – it seems as if you can’t breed out “The Stoopid” with evolution after all – but I digress.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Okay – so lets count here Gopher – let’s count the sentences … I count 4 – that’s 4 short sentences in the Introduction and Preamble of the Declaration of Independence and in those 4 short missives the Founders pretty much committed “Treason” as you call it – but to even make it better – they left a legacy – nay, it’s a directive to those of us hundreds of years later that we can and should throw off such Government and to provide new Guards for their future.

While there is no language in the US Constitution itself that specifies this – it doesn’t need to. It’s already been said. In plain everyday Gopher language. But alas luckily for Gophers everywhere, the US Constitution also uses some of the same language in it’s preamble :

We the People of the United State, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Now a thinking Gopher would probably at this point say – “well golly gee who’s this We the People of the United States” And come up with the conclusion that “The People” are – the same “People” that wrote the Declaration of Independence.

But I fear you may not be a thinking Gopher – so let’s draw it out shall we?

Now take your Crayola and connect dots 2 and 3 ….see what it says under Dot three Gopher? “U.S. Constitution”.. Good, Excellent!!

See the line you just made with your Crayola? It goes from the Declaration of Independence through it’s writings – straight to the US Constitution. One document does not exist without the other. Get the concept?

Okay now that we’ve established that concept – we’ll get to the rest of your Assertions…One thing that always amazes me about Gophers is how much of “The Stoopid” They can pack into just a few short sentences, truly it’s amazing….. a gift …it’s weapons grade stuff. But again, Duty to the Empire and all that I’ll defuse this….Hey wait do I get Hostile Fire Pay for this !?!?

You need to really understand what the second ammendment Amendment is saying. It is a simple statement that a standing army is not a good idea. States militia should act as defense. That failed hard in the war of 1812, and by the time of the civil war, it was done and gone.

Fixed it for you….no charge. If you are going to argue the U.S Constitution and lecture others with your brilliant understanding of Constitutional principles *snort* – do try to at least spell check your drivel mkay? Not to be a spelling Nazi or anything but the Imperial Grammar Tsar does at times get so very cranky about that sort of thing, and may G-d help you then.

The 2nd Amendment :

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

I see nothing about this statement anywhere that says a “standing army is not a good idea”. Do you need some sort of soopersekeret gopher vision to find it?

Oh wait – you’re a ‘Living Constitution” Gopher, aren’t you?

That explains it all. You have flat out ignored recent cases like Heller, because damn it – it just doesn’t fit that whole “The Constitution says what I say it says !!!11!!Elevenity!!” Meme.

Do you have any concept of what a Militia is? What the word actually means?
Here – let me change the color of my Crayola for you – I don’t want to confuse you.

1. An army composed of ordinary citizens rather than professional soldiers.
2. A military force that is not part of a regular army and is subject to call for service in an emergency.
3. The whole body of physically fit civilians eligible by law for military service.

That’s you Gopher - You are the Militia – er, well you would be if you didn’t wet your frilly laced pink man-panties every time a scary gun came within 200 miles of you I guess.

So now I have to ask – what exactly is the point here in your argument ?

You’ve said the 2nd means standing armies are a bad idea – but then turned around and said that militias wont work – That there is no more ‘militia’….so I’m left with wading through this weapons grade stupid – and finally left with the conclusion you are trying somehow to say that….there is no need to keep and bear arms do I have that right?

To that I ask, What? – we’re all supposed to sing Kum-Bi-Yah while holding hands around a bonfire and – that is going to defend and protect us?

When Mr. Meth-Head and his tweaker buddies show up in the dead of night looking to rob us of the very “Life Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness” the founders fought a bloody war over – we’ll simply do what? Call 911? Do an on the spot intervention and talk the fuckers to death? Brilliant!

When a DHS directive comes down that the serfs are just getting a bit to big for their britches and need to be taken down a notch – and they come kicking in peoples doors like the Redcoats did – The same Redcoats that – by the way, got their asses handed to them by a “ragtag bunch of militia” ….we are going to do what? File a fucking grievance? Call a lawyer? Vote For Hope and Change?

Bah – Frankly, this is getting a bit tedious – so all I can summarize here Gopher is that you’re either forgetting those Ritalin pills – or you’re just some special kind of “The Stoopid” – Like I said – Weapons Grade.

Come to think of it, in the spirit of equal outcomes, this qualifies me for government benefits. Like free high-capacity magazines for all of my firearms that use magazines. And an extra box of ammo for each, every month. I won’t even insist on replacing the Stoeger with an SRM 1216, just a mag extension.

Come to think of it, in the spirit of equal outcomes, this qualifies me for government benefits. Like free high-capacity magazines for all of my firearms that use magazines. And an extra box of ammo for each, every month. I won’t even insist on replacing the Stoeger with an SRM 1216, just a mag extension.

It’s a talent, but consider yourself lucky, at least so far – The Emperor himself hasn’t turned his gaze your way …That shit is nuclear.

I thank you for the kind words of appreciation, good sir, but there really isn’t much left of this particular Gopher for me to stomp on now that you and the rest of the ClueBrigade have turned him into a pink mist of retarded molecules.

“Preserve, Protect and Defend the Constitution of the United states against all enemies Foreign and Domestic!”

Not to mention bear true faith and allegiance to the same.
Good call, Old Dog.
How it was written, not an argument open to interpretation. It means what it says, Quite simple, really…. For such actions prove a convenient refuge for those seeking to muddy the waters…..an old gambit.
We have a Supreme Court for that task.
I took that oath, forty-three years ago….it remains in force, until God calls me, Home, and perhaps even then.
I remember pointing out to a since unelected corrupt city council those words ring sacred to me….then………and now.
Many view it as quaint…….I vew them as beneath contempt.
Why does anyone need to own an AR-15?
You might ask the government the same question, I won’t be waiting up.
As for an answer?…We choose to, for target shooting, self-defense and the sheer joy, yes joy, at simply looking at a fine piece of machinery.
Also, many here remain acutely aware of the foibles of human nature…….having lived it.
And please, for heavens sake, quit trying to present the issue of need in order to mask your neurotic phobia. I suggest industrial strength psychiatric treatment………..
I unfortunately don’t own one, but my M1-A, firing a far more powerful cartridge, that I do own…….
And maybe some day…….

Yeah, I missed most of it too, Mrs. M……but better late than never. I think he has the idea. We remain a bunch of slavering gun heads, etc. It might blow their minds knowing I do not feel safe without a loaded gun at the ready, my trusty .45.

Seems old Randyboopsie ran off to play somewhere else. He’s just as dense in the comments there. Hope he comes back, he could be fun.LC 0311 Sir Crunchie I.M.H., K.o.E. recently posted..What’s on your Google ?

Interesting take, Rogue,,.I can see your point, in my case there is matter of an oath. Aside from that it is written in the Bill of Rights. .Besides, I sometimes feel like I am developing a siege mentality. None of the Sacramento fats cats will like our response. In martial law all bets are off. . I am praying they are tied up in the big shitties. What the politicians have done is shown their true hand…. I will be damned if all my stuff is taken to feed the fucking grasshoppers. I’d give it to friends first. I also believe some warning time would be given to we rural folk. How would a soldier feel knowing his family was disarmed and helpless?